[cheap-Jack]

Hi.

I remember in the 90 years I listen a Basis Debut and that vinyl sounded so hissy as ever... :

Nothing is perfect - same applies to any digital media.

But if "hissy" means record surface noise. Then play it wet. Moisture drowns out any record surface noise,. That's my hands-on experience for many years since day one I started vinyl.

Please don' t blame vinyl if you have not done yr homework thoroughtly.

c-J

[JohnR]

The most compelling reason for someone who is interested in the entire history of recorded music is that a vast number of recordings have never been issued on cd.

That's my reason too. And the fact that I had an opportunity on a couple of occasions to buy a few feet at bargain prices.

[toocool4]

Why vinyl or Tapes?

For me I grow up with vinyl and tapes and since I have always been used to quality systems, why change.

Done correctly both digital and analogue sounds amazing, it all depends on the implementation.

I like physical media in my hands, great record covers and booklets that goes with it.

Yes vinyl and tapes are a lot more hassle, maybe but not to me.
See my avatar for my vinyl player, which is an Acoustic Solid One to One / Dynavector 507MKII tone arm. Tape deck a Nakamichi CR-7. I do all my own recordings onto TDK MA-XG and yes I still use Sony tape personals for my daily commute to and from work.

Yes guys at work laugh at me for using tapes as they all use mp3 players. I always shut them up when we have a comparison of the same music, their jaw hits the ground as the tape player blows the mp3 player away. Tape players I have are the Sony WM-D6C pro, Sony WM-DC2 and Sony WM-DD9 all going through a Ray Samuels P-51 Mustang portable amp.
After that they always say the mp3 is more convenient as they can carry all their music collection with them, yes it is but I am not interested in carrying all my music with me. I am only interested in carrying what I need for the day.
One thing I find is the people that carry so much music with them, don’t actually listen to much they just skip.

[Guy 13]

Why vinyl or Tapes?

For me I grow up with vinyl and tapes and since I have always been used to quality systems, why change.

Done correctly both digital and analogue sounds amazing, it all depends on the implementation.

I like physical media in my hands, great record covers and booklets that goes with it.

Yes vinyl and tapes are a lot more hassle, maybe but not to me.
See my avatar for my vinyl player, which is an Acoustic Solid One to One / Dynavector 507MKII tone arm. Tape deck a Nakamichi CR-7. I do all my own recordings onto TDK MA-XG and yes I still use Sony tape personals for my daily commute to and from work.

Yes guys at work laugh at me for using tapes as they all use mp3 players. I always shut them up when we have a comparison of the same music, their jaw hits the ground as the tape player blows the mp3 player away. Tape players I have are the Sony WM-D6C pro, Sony WM-DC2 and Sony WM-DD9 all going through a Ray Samuels P-51 Mustang portable amp.
After that they always say the mp3 is more convenient as they can carry all their music collection with them, yes it is but I am not interested in carrying all my music with me. I am only interested in carrying what I need for the day.
One thing I find is the people that carry so much music with them, don’t actually listen to much they just skip.

Hi toocool4 and all Audio Circle members.

I agree 100% with you.

Guy 13

[FullRangeMan]

Hi.

I remember in the 90 years I listen a Basis Debut and that vinyl sounded so hissy as ever... :

Nothing is perfect - same applies to any digital media.

But if "hissy" means record surface noise. Then play it wet. Moisture drowns out any record surface noise,. That's my hands-on experience for many years since day one I started vinyl.

Please don' t blame vinyl if you have not done yr homework thoroughtly.

c-J

I unknow of this procedure. How exactly does it work??  The liquid is water??

[simoon]

I have to say vinyl is neither superior nor inferior to CDs. They are just a little differerent, with different pluses and minuses.

Exactly.

Some of those pluses and minuses lend themselves to different music types. So, the format I use is sometimes dependent on what type of music I am listening to.

If you are only wanting 'better sound', but never had Lps before. Run do not hide.. Go buy a better DAC or  something.

I pretty much agree with this statement. Those of us that either grew up in vinyl, are able to 'listen around' the noise and clicks and pops ((if they exist). If someone can't get past the noise to hear the positive attributes of vinyl, it is not the format for them.

The folks who make all these claims that Lps sound so much better than digital just never had a decent digital setup. (OR they love the flaws in vinyl, and hate the flaws in digital..) Personally  i think the folks who constantly shout out how wonderful vinyl is are crazy.. Now obviously I am interested in vinyl, just not some nutcase over it.
All you nutcases feel free to blast me. LOL.

This is where I disagree.

You state that those that claim that vinyl is a better format than digital are crazy, yet you even state a logical reason they may make this claim; that they are better able to tolerate the flaws with vinyl than the flaws with digital. Isn't that a sound (pun intended) reason for them to like vinyl better than digital?

Why would preferring the attributes of vinyl over the attribute of digital make someone crazy?

[*Scotty*]

It would drive me crazy if the only way I could listen to the music I like was in 15 min. long pieces. I listen to vinyl on an active basis, it is not something I do while relaxing. I listen to wavfiles from my computer when I want chill out without interruptions. When I used a DUAL TT with ability to stack records I could listen to half a symphony without interruption depending on how the sides were laid out.
Scotty

[Devil Doc]

The only beef I have with vinyl is, you need to be sober. I listen to too many CD's these days.

Doc

[zray72]

I find that it is more fun to go through the used record bins and when I find an record I'm interested in to be able to read the liner notes. It makes a complete purchase for me. CDs are???

[FullRangeMan]

The only beef I have with vinyl is, you need to be sober. I listen to too many CD's these days.

Doc

I know what you are saying:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=383V75X3Kk8
Other vinyl ''feature'' it is a short time media, 20 minutes a side, 24 on Tubular Bells.
Today some Ambient Music pieces are over 70 minutes long.

[rmurray]

   I came up with LPs (78s too lol) but what I listen too today is far nicer on (since 1995 or so}  cd  Early cds were awful and gave digital a bad rep but the current stuff, if well engineered, is a vast improvement as( well as the much better equipment available ) I.e.   Bryston's CD-1CD .  Vinyl is the best sound for the older material but I don't listen to that often.  To each his own.

[Elizabeth]

It would drive me crazy if the only way I could listen to the music I like was in 15 min. long pieces. Scotty

Just think of listening to a long symphony on 78s...
Or an opera...
A nightmare...

[J-Pak]

Today some Ambient Music pieces are over 70 minutes long.

I agree, great music to fall asleep to. No way to listen to that stuff on vinyl 

[jimdgoulding]

Just think of listening to a long symphony on 78s...
Or an opera...
A nightmare...

I listen to opera and classical on 331/3 and it never bothers me to flip or change a record in the least.  I dare say that if you listen to much of the same it wouldn't bother you either unless you're working, I suppose.

[jarcher]

I used to listen to vinyl back in the late 80's & early 90's because I could buy it used a lot cheaper than CD's (which were way overpriced then) and they sounded better and held up a lot better than cassettes - which no matter how well I tried to treat them, would always eventually stretch & mess up the sound.  All it took was using it in once in your cheap car stereo to screw up a tape.

This was also part of the reason I got back into vinyl now in the 2010's.  You can still buy a box of records - especially classical music - for .50 a piece. 

But : the real reason I invested much more heavily in the gear this go around (table / cartridge / pre-amp) - echoing what many have already said here - is that the sound quality can really surpass even good digital.  Aside from sounding more "natural" and less "fatiguing", it occasionally is capable of those magic goose bump raising moments that just seem more rare w/ digital playback. In this era of free to almost free on-demand digital music, the cost advantage is not as compelling as it used to be.

And not all decent rigs have to be super expensive.  A full "vintage" turntable & receiver w/ phono stage + a decent cartridge + speakers doesn't have to cost you much over $500.  E.g. one "system" I have is a $60 Sansui 2000A, a $60 Kenwood KD3050, a $100 Sumiko Pearl cartridge, $60 Boston Acoustic A40 speakers and $20 worth of 16AWG speaker cable.  Total cost : $300. 

Another, a $350 Pioneer SA9800 + $250 Conrad Johnson / Sonographe SG3 TT, a used Ortofon 2M Blue $100, Vandersteen 2CE $350, extra speaker cable I had lying around = just a bit over $1K.  And this is the "high end" vintage system.


And if you want to do digital, $150 tops for something from Squeezebox.  Sometimes I really wonder why I need anything more & don't sell all the rest of the gear.

[rbbert]

For all those audiophiles out there, please forgive my faux pas, but what is the deal with vinyl? Why are some people willing to fork out sooo much money for a fancy turntable and tonearm?

And also, is this generally considered of better, worse or different audio quality to analogue tape?

Remember, this is the vinyl circle, so you're going to get biased comments in favor of vinyl.

It should be noted that there is a ton of music (both new and old) available only on CD, quite probably more than is available only on vinyl. 

Also in most polls of self-professed audiophiles, a majority listen primarily or only to digital.  Likewise a majprity listen to both vinyl and digital, so your eventual choice can't be "wrong" either in your own mind or those of your peers.

[neobop]

Remember, this is the vinyl circle, so you're going to get biased comments in favor of vinyl.

It should be noted that there is a ton of music (both new and old) available only on CD, quite probably more than is available only on vinyl. 

Also in most polls of self-professed audiophiles, a majority listen primarily or only to digital.  Likewise a majprity listen to both vinyl and digital, so your eventual choice can't be "wrong" either in your own mind or those of your peers.

The question was, why are vinyl enthusiasts willing to spend big money on equipment, not a comparison to digital.  That comparison seems inevitable, but you said nothing to answer the orig question.  Popularity in the audiophile community, at least that aspect, also has nothing to do with the answer.
neo

[FullRangeMan]

This answer seems clear to me:
- They had deep pockets,
- They are used to vinyl sound, may even get a rejection to the non euphonic sound, transparent/linear from digital,
- They have nostalgia of his youth, and vinyl makes them relive the good times, offering a safe compensation(no drugs).
Surely there is more reasons, all about personal taste.

[doug s.]

maybe it's cuz i grew up w/winyl.  but, to these ears, a $2k winyl rig - complete, including turntable, arm, cartridge, fono stage - will sound more like music than any redbook rig at any price.  from my limited exposure to hi-rez, i suspect that is also true, but, as i said, my exposure is limited, so maybe not...

ymmv,

doug s.

[woodsyi]

I do vinyl because it sounds good.  I do CDs because it's convenient.  I am in the process of setting up HiRez cause it's the latest thing where all the cool audiophiles are hanging out.